Inside the DPZ Co-Design Emails and Text Messages Part II: DPZ's Drinking Game?

A trove of emails and text messages has been turned over to the county from our consultant DPZ.  The history of the issues with the master-planning effort for OLF-8 was posted in part I.

I'm going through the emails and texts over the next several evenings and I will do a series of posts on what I find.

And there are serious issues that need to be discussed about this issue and they will be discussed.  

But I found a couple texts early on this weekend that were somewhat amusing.  So I'll post them next.  I hope I can keep from "spitting out my Guacamole.."

This exchange, these two texts above, was interesting.  

They come out seemingly complimentary as they watch our meeting and comment along like some strange version of Mystery Science Theater 3000- but then they devolve into laughing and giggling.  One member suggests it is some kind of a drinking game and another talks about getting "sober."  It's weird.  We are all taking this seriously--is DPZ and their team?

Is This OLF-8 Master Plan Actually an Opportunity to Get Growth's Impacts on Infrastructure Right?

I don't support it, But if we must accept thousands of additional residential units on OLF-8 in Beulah--I believe we should charge Impact Fees on OLF-8 specifically and exclusively---to offset the burdens on infrastructure and schools such high-density, high-intensity, urban-style residential will create.

As we stumble toward the end of the excruciating, apparently non-impartial, Rube-Goldbergesqe "effort" to finish the OLF-8 Master Plan----a question comes to mind that is worth asking.  Is this relentless, unending, concerted and orchestrated push for massive, additional residential development in Beulah on OLF-8 specifically---is this actually an opportunity to get growth's impacts on Infrastructure right as it pertains to what we allow on OLF-8?

One of the reasons I ran for this job in 2016 was because I saw the rampant, uncontrolled residential growth in Beulah that was permitted that swamped our schools and overwhelmed our infrastructure.  It was allowed to continue unfettered by the county because the state got rid of concurrency in 2011, and the County did likewise in 2013--stripping the concurrency provisions from the Land Development Code (LDC) in that year.  And then, the residential development floodgates opened in Beulah and we are seeing the resultant condition:  Schools overcrowded and traffic and stormwater infrastructure overwhelmed.

This is why I have funded the $300,000.00 effort to master-plan the greater Beulah area--a process that is moving forward.  It is also why I spent 13 months with a 9-member committee the county impaneled at my request to get community feedback about the best way to master plan this greater Beulah area--precincts 43, 68, and 5 (and subsequently the new precinct 114 in Beulah as well).  This "Greater-Beulah" contract has been awarded--and the work will commence soon.  More to come on that later.

And this is why--if we are now going to "approve" thousands and thousands of new residential units forced on us, constructed on OLF-8 at the behest of the "opinion" of DPZ and their influencers within the NFCU coalition--we ought to implement impact fees on any such residential construction contemplated on OLF-8 if we are legally allowed to do so.  We should do it because our infrastructure cannot take it without upgrades and the only Beulah elementary school is hundreds of students over capacity already.

To summarize: we don't have the infrastructure to support 60 DU/AC and the concomitant 1000's of housing units this would produce on OLF-8--so I am arguing against allowing this at all. 

Commercial development and jobs projects would build slowly, over years and decades--allowing for the infrastructure to build to match. If residential is permitted however--the private sector would swoop in and build apartments, townhomes, and condos faster than you could say "abracadabra" and we would be further gridlocked within 8-10 months. Residential builders are aggressive, determined, relentless and FAST. (They are not FDOT project managers struggling for years to finish two-lane blacktop projects…)

So----- If I must accept any residential on the field (which we do not need), I will argue for impact fees for this one geographic area, OLF-8, if legal to do so--in order that this massive residential influx if allowed will have to pay for the impacts to the school board and also for the road widening on Frank Reeder Road that simply cannot support this MASSIVE residential infusion of building.

59th Coffee with the Commissioner this Wednesday: Discussion of Homelessness Locally and Panhandling

We will have our 59th Coffee with the Commissioner event this coming Wednesday, March 10th.

We will be having a discussion about homelessness, panhandling, and what steps we can take as a community and as a county to assist with this issue.  I've had constituents ask about this, we have discussed it in workshops and meetings, and I have had my own two recent encounters with aggressive panhandlers purporting to be "Homeless and in Need Of Help!"

About the event--how to participate:

Join District 1 Commissioner Jeff Bergosh at his virtual 59th Coffee with the Commissioner event Wednesday, March 10. The live stream will take place from 6:30 - 7:30 a.m. 

Escambia County Administrator Janice Gilley, Emergency Manager Eric Gilmore and special guest, Michael Kimbrel, the co-founder of Satoshi Forest and director of the Alfred Washburn Center. Discussion will include the county's response to COVID-19, vaccinations and CARES act expenditures. The group will also have an in-depth conversation about the ongoing issue of homelessness and how best to address this issue to help folks who find themselves in this situation.

To join the meeting, go to the following Facebook page at 6:30 a.m. on Wednesday, March 10 and watch the live stream: www.facebook.com/CommissionerBergosh/. 

Residents are encouraged to send virtual questions and comments they would like to discuss with District 1 Commissioner during the event through Facebook

Meeting With the Superintendent....Another NEW School Coming to Beulah?

I had an excellent meeting with Superintendent of Schools Dr. Tim Smith Yesterday.  New Schools, School Discipline, Concurrency, possibly a Boarding School--the conversation was wide ranging...

Yesterday I had the opportunity to sit down and speak with the Escambia County School District's new Superintendent of Schools for about an hour at my office.

The meeting was facilitated and organized by District 1 School Board member Kevin Adams.

It was good to meet Dr. Smith and hear some of his ideas for the future of the district.  And discussions soon turned to the topic of the need for another school out in the fast-growing Beulah community of District 1.  The school district has shown interest in the OLF-8 property for a school site--however the ask of a minimum of 25 acres seems high.

Kevin Adams stated he is interested in constructing a K-8 facility on OLF-8.  (Ironic, I also thought a K-8 was the right move for Beulah and on OLF-8 back in 2013--but I was over-ruled and the middle school in Beulah was built instead, after which the students from the closed Woodham Middle School were "zoned" into the new Beulah Middle School--which I did not support doing.....oh well, win some and lose some--it happened and I lost that one 8 years ago....)

According to Superintendent of Operations Shawn Dennis, whom we briefly  conferenced into yesterday's discussion--a minimum of 25 acres would be needed for such a facility.  The Superintendent asked Mr. Dennis to look into vertical designs for such schools--in an attempt to lower the required number of acres.  Dennis indicated he would do so.

In the background of this meeting, I see a growing chorus of online posters who want "Beulah High School."  Would the district build a new K-8 and then "repurpose" the huge Beulah Middle School as a High School?  Who knows?

But does the student population (which has been declining steadily for over a decade for various reasons) even justify construction of another, a brand new, high school--if all of the existing ones have excess capacity (with the exception of Tate, WFHS, and B.T. Washington High?)

I mean--what is the % Capacity for PHS, Escambia, and Pine Forest?

I want to assist with the school district in every way I can from my current position as a commissioner.  I attended and graduated from these public schools, as did all of my children.  I am a MASSIVE public school supporter.  So this was my pledge to Superintendent Smith at yesterday's meeting--to be a big

DPZ Town Hall on OLF-8 Happened........200 or so Participated....Ho Hum.......

The DPZ town hall occurred last night playing to an audience of about 200 or so "online"....(our County's population is 315,000 and District 1's population exceeds 63,000...)

...And I hung in there for about an hour and a half for the one after another series of soliloquies.  I utilized the "Q&A" function to ask 7 specific questions for which I received various degrees of responses.

The latest hybrid plan was presented, and the DPZ staff took turns discussing various pros and cons of the previous plans and the recent hybrid plan.

They also made a big production about what they consider their willingness to do this online zoom meeting "pro-bono"--or no cost.  They put this in their press release and also reiterated this position. (Meanwhile, I am told their invoices submitted thus far to the county are approaching a Million Dollar$.)  But this zoom call was done for "free."

When I got on the call, there were a total of 137 attendees on the online town hall, plus 10 members of the DPZ staff.  On the facebook livestream, the attendee number fluctuated between 29 and 46 attendees.

So it looks like about 200 or so citizens were on the call total (unless some were on the call and on facebook livestream like I was--in which case that number could vary and be less)

The DPZ staff put a poll up asking some questions and they report a total of 210 folks participated and voted in that poll.  I'm not certain these were 210 unique poll responses, or were duplicates allowed? Not sure.

Not surprisingly, though,  the poll results from this small number of apparently like-minded attendees mirrors what DPZ wants:  Amazing!   

Q1--less than 100 acres for jobs --71% for 100 acres or less to 29% wanting more than 100 acres

Q2--High Density Residential -- 209% for high-density residential  to 8% for NO Housing (wait, how can that be accurate if it doesn't equal 100%?--someone ask the experts at DPZ to explain please)

Q3--Completion/build out timeline--76% 10 years or longer, 23% 5 years or less..

Afterword, at least one citizen excitingly, in giddy fashion, exclaimed what a smashing success this charrette was.  And her excited post got two or three "likes" and four comments....

Meanwhile, an exasperated nearby resident tagged me on this post to facebook that very quickly garnered 72 thumbs ups and 40 comments and counting....

"Jeff Bergosh

,

I have been asking to speak for about an hour (since the poll questions went up) and have been ignored. DPZ does not want to hear from the community and get our feedback! I want to make it clear that I do not want a single house on OLF 8. I want to see community amenities, specialty grocers (Trader Joe’s would be awesome), high end/high tech jobs, green space, schools, retail and restaurants, post office, a recreation center, and libraries.

I do not want my property value decreased by high density, lower cost housing! I do not want 500+ acres or warehouses, industrial buildings."

To which I replied:

"Melanie French

--. I support amenities for the residents, a school site, parks, some restaurants and retail for all of us out here. I also support lots of clean tech, high tech jobs in buildings that are built to high standards of aesthetic quality--like NFCU's buildings. Like you an many others I have spoken with--what I adamantly DO NOT support is any more high-intensity, high-impact, traffic exacerbating dense residential that DPZ and NFCU are pushing on this site. They are pushing it, and most residents like me ( a 17-year homeowner in Beulah) know our infrastructure cannot keep up if we allow thousands MORE apartments on this field.

But in the end, it will be a compromise. Neither you nor I nor anyone (DPZ, NFCU, etc.) is going to get 100% of what they want. And we will all more than likely have to accept some of what we specifically do not want.

But being the optimist I am---I believe that field is big enough for all of us to get a win, to get lots of the things we do all want!"

3.5 FAR, 60 DU/AC

Kirk successfully defeated the Kobayashi Maru Simulation, but that has nothing to do with what a 3.5FAR, 60 DU/AC means...But are there similarities?

What does this mean and who wants this?  3.5 FAR, 60 DU/AC?  Well, it’s not James Tiberius Kirk’s secret reprogramming code-tool utilized to defeat the Kobayashi Maru simulation.  It’s not science fiction.  It’s not even fiction.

It refers to building and massing and scale.

It is code speak for high-density, vertical dwelling capacity.

And this is what DPZ Co-Design “recommended” for “housing” at OLF-8.  In writing, to staff.

As I go through all the emails from DPZ that came out via a public records request, I’ve run across this recommendation to staff.  I also see that, rightfully, it elicits IMMEDIATE push back from our planning folks.  Check out this exchange from January 8th-12^th 2021…

Mike Weich, DPZ Co-Design: “After reviewing different plans and potential capacity we think that a FAR of 3.5 and a density of 60 DU/AC are the limits needed for OLF8”

County Planner: “Staff is really concerned about the density being at 60 DU/AC..Can we please, come up with a good plan on how to describe this to the Commissioners and the Citizens. This will freak, scare and blow peoples mind.  Escambia County has had nothing like this...”

County Planning Supervisor: “Yes, this is concerning.  Consideration needs to be given for the specific area of these types structures for the increase in density-Definitely not for the entire area”

Mike Weich, DPZ Co-Design: “We completely agree, that’s why we included the areas that would have this density only, which is less than 1/3 of the site.”

Marina Khoury, DPZ Co-Design: “...We first need to convince Bergosh that residential is desirable on a site this large, before we begin to show different density types.”

But here is the thing.  I don’t need to be convinced of anything, Marina—I’m listening to my constituents that have told me LOUDLY and CLEARLY, they DON’T want ANY housing on this field.  NONE.  We have too much already and our infrastructure has not kept up. I’ve said from the start that I realized I would likely have to accept some compromise on this----but wow!  This?!? What will these people think in Beulah when they figure out you all want 60 units per acre?

Not only does DPZ and Navy Federal Credit Union (apparently) want housing---they want 4-story, heavily massed, 60 apartments per acre housing!  This is the LAST thing I think we need.  This is the

Was the Meeting Noticed Properly?

 

There was a hastily-arranged "town hall" announced this week.  There will be multiple commissioners on the call and an issue that WILL come before the board will be discussed.  Was the meeting noticed properly, though?

Although I believe it is premature and didn't necessarily feel it was warranted yet, before the BCC workshopped the latest DPZ hybrid plan for OLF-8, a "Town Hall" online has been scheduled for next Tuesday afternoon by DPZ Co-Design.

This potential town hall was mentioned at our recent meeting---but again--- I did not know it was a firm, absolute "go" until late Wednesday afternoon.  Thursday, I had my aide Debbie Kenney sign me up online to participate---which I intend on doing.  Participating, interacting, and speaking.

Because although I recognize the current iteration for the OLF-8 field is much better than previous renditions----I still think it needs a lot of work and a lot of massaging to get it just right.  It's not like this is the last and final plan--regardless of who was in a special last minute meeting to cobble it together.  It did not come off the mountain on tablets inscribed by fire and lightning bolts from heaven....

So although I don't think it is ready for primetime and the "town-hall" is premature--I will participate.

But wait--what if my counterparts want to as well?  From the meeting comments and other things I have heard from other sources--it's my understanding at least one or two of my counterparts will be on the livestream townhall as well.

And that is where I think this knee-jerk, hastily called town hall may put us in hot water if we are not careful.  Although this is not a meeting of the board---if one or more board members speak on this land-use  issue at this special "OLF-8 Town hall" meeting (and this is OBVIOUSLY something that will come before the board for a vote)--if NOT properly advertised--- this could potentially be considered a meeting out of the sunshine.  I don't want that to happen.  I am going to speak, and I don't necessarily want my peers precluded from doing likewise.

So in a few hours when everyone wakes up, I'll send an email and find out.  I hope this event was properly noticed, with a 7-day ad.

Otherwise, if it wasn't, it would probably be wise to advertise it properly to a different date.

We'll see though, maybe DPZ and the county team did, in fact, already advertise it.  IF so, no big deal.  See ya Tuesday at the townhall!